Sam Newman, Garry Lyon face Supreme Court grilling in Susan Alberti defamation suit

[Topdog]

She will have a very hard time getting money from our courts for this. We aren't in the US.

[Stefcep]

Hardly a political point more a moral and sexist one. A lesson that recent events show that a number of people in football need to learn.
Good on her.

was she raped by a football team?

[Stefcep]

I cannot believe some of the rampant misogynism on this thread, and I'm a bloke!
There is no genuine debate here ....get real and lift your game fellow woofers!!!!!!!

i know what you mean: its mysogynism to have true equality these days..wake up and look around you: young males are less likely to perform well at school and complete year 12, male suicide rates are 10x higher, fathers are getting crucified in the Family Court, funding for male diseases like prostate cancer is a fraction of that for breast cancer yet equal numbers die from each one, there's "positive discrimination" ie its "positive" when its discrimination against men, in the work place.

Sam Newman is an idiot, but this women is there to make a political point. i hope she gets shafted and gets to pay costs as well.

[Raw Toast]

i know what you mean: its mysogynism to have true equality these days..wake up and look around you: young males are less likely to perform well at school and complete year 12, male suicide rates are 10x higher, fathers are getting crucified in the Family Court, funding for male diseases like prostate cancer is a fraction of that for breast cancer yet equal numbers die from each one, there's "positive discrimination" ie its "positive" when its discrimination against men, in the work place.

Sam Newman is an idiot, but this women is there to make a political point. i hope she gets shafted and gets to pay costs as well.

Very selective use of stats here - for instance young males do not perform as well at school yet they will still earn an average of 17% more than their female counterparts over the course of their life-time. And the idea that men are more discriminated in the work-force than women just doesn't stack up against any reading of the evidence.

The legal and health issues are complicated, but to see them as simply part of an overall picture of discrimination against men is to buy into a particular conspiracy theory.

Newman said women have no role in footy and defamed Alberti who has been an important servant of the club we all love. To imply that she should just take it sounds dangerously similar to the way footy refused to combat racism pre-1993, and the way many would like to see it refuse to confront sexism.

I don't want to get into a debate that descends into name-calling and worse, but it saddens me that a hard-working loyal servant of our club is so easily derided by some fellow supporters.

[LostDoggy]

She will have a very hard time getting money from our courts for this. We aren't in the US.

well you might be in for a shock Topdog!

[Max469]

Time to close this thread I think - it is getting out of hand and I don't want WOOF to become BIG FOOTY.

Max

[LostDoggy]

Very selective use of stats here - for instance young males do not perform as well at school yet they will still earn an average of 17% more than their female counterparts over the course of their life-time. And the idea that men are more discriminated in the work-force than women just doesn't stack up against any reading of the evidence.

The legal and health issues are complicated, but to see them as simply part of an overall picture of discrimination against men is to buy into a particular conspiracy theory.

Newman said women have no role in footy and defamed Alberti who has been an important servant of the club we all love. To imply that she should just take it sounds dangerously similar to the way footy refused to combat racism pre-1993, and the way many would like to see it refuse to confront sexism.

I don't want to get into a debate that descends into name-calling and worse, but it saddens me that a hard-working loyal servant of our club is so easily derided by some fellow supporters.

This deserves to be re posted.

[The Bulldogs Bite]

Very selective use of stats here - for instance young males do not perform as well at school yet they will still earn an average of 17% more than their female counterparts over the course of their life-time. And the idea that men are more discriminated in the work-force than women just doesn't stack up against any reading of the evidence.

The legal and health issues are complicated, but to see them as simply part of an overall picture of discrimination against men is to buy into a particular conspiracy theory.

The point is that both genders are discriminated against in various aspects of life. There's no conspiracy theory, it's just the way it is. Most of us (including myself) are more than fine with it because generally it all balances out. I'm certainly not complaining at the "disadvantages" of being a male - myself along with a couple of others are merely pointing them out.

However, saying without hesitation that women are discriminated against and men aren't is naive.

[Sockeye Salmon]

Very selective use of stats here - for instance young males do not perform as well at school yet they will still earn an average of 17% more than their female counterparts over the course of their life-time.

Surely the figures are slewed by women leaving the workforce to have a family?

Take half a dozen years out of any man's career and he'll struggle to kick on as well.

[Raw Toast]

The point is that both genders are discriminated against in various aspects of life. There's no conspiracy theory, it's just the way it is. Most of us (including myself) are more than fine with it because generally it all balances out. I'm certainly not complaining at the "disadvantages" of being a male - myself along with a couple of others are merely pointing them out.

However, saying without hesitation that women are discriminated against and men aren't is naive.

I'm not saying men are not discriminated against, they clearly are in certain cases. But the point is that in the workforce (and an unfortunately large number of other areas) the discrimination does NOT balance out.

Surely the figures are slewed by women leaving the workforce to have a family?

Take half a dozen years out of any man's career and he'll struggle to kick on as well.

Indeed, but as far as I know these figures take that into account (in terms of total money earned at least). I'll go back over the studies in a while (fairly busy at the moment, ), but this article gives a good summary of my recollection of it all:
http://www.news.com.au/business/stor...07-462,00.html

One key paragraph is:
"Women in full-time work earn 17 per cent less than men, and women graduates start on salaries $2000 below men with the same qualifications. And fewer than 2 per cent of ASX 200 have a female chief executive."

[Sockeye Salmon]

One key paragraph is:
"Women in full-time work earn 17 per cent less than men, and women graduates start on salaries $2000 below men with the same qualifications.

Perhaps women aren't as aggressive negotiating salary packages?

And fewer than 2 per cent of ASX 200 have a female chief executive."

To become a chief executive of a ASX200 company your career cannot afford going on hold while you have a family. That would go a long way to accounting for that figure.

Perhaps women aren't as aggressive politically to get to the top? To make it to the top it's just as important to be able to take out your competitors from within as it is to be talanted.

[LostDoggy]

Perhaps women aren't as aggressive negotiating salary packages?



To become a chief executive of a ASX200 company your career cannot afford going on hold while you have a family. That would go a long way to accounting for that figure.

Perhaps women aren't as aggressive politically to get to the top? To make it to the top it's just as important to be able to take out your competitors from within as it is to be talanted.

The old biology is destiny argument, gee I haven't heard that in awhile.

[LostDoggy]

[QUOTE=Sockeye Salmon;124869]Perhaps women aren't as aggressive negotiating salary packages?



To become a chief executive of a ASX200 company your career cannot afford going on hold while you have a family. That would go a long way to accounting for that figure.

So none of these captains of industry have children

Perhaps women aren't as aggressive politically to get to the top? To make it to the top it's just as important to be able to take out your competitors from within as it is to be talanted.[/QUOTE

[Sockeye Salmon]

So none of these captains of industry have children

I'm fairly sure none of them gave birth.

The fact is it's predominately women who take leave to stay home (or at least reduce hours) to look after kids.

[Topdog]

well you might be in for a shock Topdog!

Trust me I won't be. How is she going to prove that she has lost anything by this "defamation"?